Best GPU
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
what is the best GPU out there?
GM200
>>51862991
5960X
GTX 970
Gtx 970. Visit gpuboss
>>51862991
gtx970
>>51863022
/thread
Wich one is better for gaming:
TItan x or the 980ti
Pre vulkan:
Who cares
Post vulkan:
R9 Fury
>>51863114
980ti
>>51862991
GeForce 480
>>51863130
Because?
>>51863182
because the customs are faster than the titan x for $300+ cheaper
>>51862991
I'll use this thread to ask the question, how much of an upgrade is 970 from 660? I bought 660 last year for triple monitor support, getting low frames in Arma3. That isn't a good enough reason for me to upgrade though, so talk me into it
How about this
Which gpu has the absolute best perf/watt? Probably some soc gpu right?
>>51864139
970 is the best card for the money nowadays.
And it rapes the 660.
>>51864242
If I'm not planning on playing a whole lot of vidya in the near future, is it worth while?
>>51862991
The full sized 960 they fitted in some laptops :^)
>>51864139
You will regret getting a 970 for triple monitor.
It gets demolished by 390, especially for high resolutions (triple monitor)
EVGA 980ti Hybrid
Can't see anything really overtaking this significantly anytime soon other than another x80ti. The temp and noise savings alone are unique.
>>51862991
intel HD because it just werks on linux
>>51863061
>>51863093
>>51863099
>>51864242
>>51862991
Enjoy your 3.5gs anons
>>51864286
Then why would you want to upgrade? To get a few fps on arma? Not worth it then unless you don't give a fuck.
You can also get a 380 and purchase asbestos sheets and a new fire extinguisher with the saved money.
>>51863093
>gpuboss
>>51864287
You mean the full sized 980 they fitted in some laptops?
>>51864335
>Implying the human eye can see more than 3.5GB anyway
>>51864408
Good point indeed. I'll invest it in higher priority things, such as a roomba or snowboard gear.
>>51862991
Maxwell M6000
670 GTX
Nvidia: Gtx 980ti
Amd: Fury X
Intel: Kek
>>51865210
If you wanna go deeper.
Nvidia: Gtx 980ti Sea Hawk (Water-cooled, Corsair/Msi)
Amd: Sapphire Fury x
Intel: Kek'd hard
>>51864472
>can't see more than 30 fps
>can't see more than 720p
>can't see more than 3.5 gb
The human eyes is fucking shit mate
>>51865292
Why not the EVGA hybrid? It's a good 20c cooler and cheaper.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2128-msi-sea-hawk-gtx-980-ti-review-and-benchmark/Page-2
960Ti
Just wait a month and you'll have the best card money can buy for $230.
>>51863093
>>51863099
Enjoy your Alzheimer's
>>51862991
only a retard would buy a GPU right now given that in 6-8 months 16/14nm chips with twice the power efficiency/maximum performance at any power level will be out.
Big Pascal and Fury2 will completely rape anything up to and including SLI Titans.
>>51867947
>why not wait at least another half year to buy a gpu for what will be twice the price of current titan prices?
You do realize that the level you are talking about is already listed at $2000-$3000?
>>51862991
Poorfag -GTX 750 Ti
Medium Budget 1080p - Gtx 970
Medium Budget 1440p- 390x
High end- 980Ti
I always get the Medium tier video card so I can easily replace things every 2-3 years
>>51868106
> 2x Titan/FuxyX GPUs listed at $2-3k
sauce on this?
>>51868211
I was talking about pascal
but two titans will cost you 2k right now stock, they are $1000 each even. If you want a custom one like a non retard those are even more
http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Graphics-Dual-Link-06G-P4-3790-KR/dp/B00IEV313U/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1450140166&sr=8-5&keywords=titan+graphics
That one just under 2k
>>51868203
a gtx 950 is $25 usd more than the 750 ti and runs a lot better.
>>51868305
I see what you're saying now, but I'm incredibly skeptical that Pascal/Fury2 will be $2k+.
The part costs should be comparable to that of the Fury X, which sells for $600-$650, and there's really virtually zero market for >$1k cards.
The better hope for most people is a 980Ti-level card that uses ~150W and sells for $300-$350.
The 28->16nm shrink at TSMC should bring down costs/bring up performance for every market segment.
>>51868619
$25 can mean alot for 3rd world people
>>51864472
>3.5GB
>eyes
Go to school please.
01000010 01000001 01001001 01010100
>>51862991
The one in your picture is a pretty good one in my opinion
>>51869086
where do you think you are?
everyone on /g/ knows the eye can't see more than:
> silky smooth 30 fps
> glorious super high definition 900p (1440p for desktops)
> 6 bits per channel color
> 3.5 GB of data
> 3000 polygons
everything else is objectively snake oil.
>>51868908
"alot" doesn't mean anything to people in the first world because it's not a fucking word. get an education you fuckwit.
Should I buy a 970 or a 4gb 960 for $100 less?
>>51870363
Hey what's wrong with 1440p?
>>51870744
faggots insisting that 3440x1440 is magically better than 3840/4096x2160 because reasons.
even 2560x1440 was only ever a poor man's 2560x1600.
>>51870785
16:9 is superior
2 390x
get rekt
>>51870874
to 21:9 ultrashorts, yes.
to 16:10 last-gen patrician 30" displays, fuck no.
Hawaii XT
>>51870921
16:10 looks awkward and ends up displaying less than 16:9
>>51871031
said nobody who has actually ever owned a 2560x1600 display.
not every game has fixed vertical FOV you know, if that's what you're trying to refer to.
for any sort of desktop use, 2560x1600 is so much better than 2560x1440 it's not even funny.
>>51871090
Why?
>>51871157
because being 11% taller lets you have more of a document visible at once, which is actually useful?
if you don't get this, try not using the bottom 10% of your monitor (tape construction paper over it or whatever) and see whether you can notice the difference.
>>51870907
y u no fury X?
>>51862991
Currently the best GPU would be the Titan X and the best video card the R9 295X2.
>No one here talking about Tesla K80
do you guys even
>>51871761
that's not a GPU chip, and it's not even a graphics card, lacking any and all display ports.
learn the difference between GPU and GPGPUs, faggot.
>>51871847
That doesn't make it not a GPU. If OP's use case is to train convnets then it's as good as it gets.
why the fuck is the titan so expensive if it's so much weaker than the much cheaper 980 ti?
Also what is the best version of the Titan: original Titan, Titan Black, or Titan X?
>>51871907
Titan X has 12 niggerbytes of GDDR5, anon.
It's definitively faster than the 980Ti, which has slightly fewer shaders in addition to having less RAM.
Fastest Titan is still probably the Z, which was a dual GPU card.
AMD Firepro W9100 Sapphire
>>51872065
>three-thousand dollars
i wish i was rich so i could make a video of me using it as a cutting board or something
>>51872065
shit like pic related confirms my misanthropy
>>51870650
the 4gb card is good for the next like five years or so
>>51872095
My boss at my previous job with an architectural firm was pissed at his computer which took forever to render shit in Autodesk's Inventor Fusion program. He just hated waiting, we found out that his rig, as the boss of an architectural firm, with a shit ton of money and a requirement for decent specs, was using a nvidia geforce 610 gt, which he scavenged from his old home computer.
So he asked us, whats the best graphics card he can get? Me and my apprentice showed him the sapphire w9000, and he bought two on amazon, and made us install them.
So i did, the machine was beautiful again, it could dig through designs with 20k+ polygons in less than 10 minutes, boss was happy, i got a bonus for installing the cards.
3 days later he says "fuck it" and decides he no longer wants to take up helping with projects, and hired two new people, and now he uses this computer for farmville.
It feels like hes using it as a cutting board.
>>51871984
That's irrelevant, nothing needs 12gb of vram. It takes insane resolutions like over 10000px wide just to max out 4gb,and at that point the processing power becomes the bottleneck, not vram. They tried a triple 4k setup with quad Titan X and it didn't work, for single 4k there's no significant reason to use Titan over 980ti.
My Gtx 670 just died , Fuck Nvidia
Vram died..
>>51872621
> ask why titan costs more while being slower
> get corrected about being slower, told why cost is higher
> say that higher memory is irrelevant
nigger are you slow in the head?
12GB is pretty much worthless at present, but that's the primary reason the Titan costs more. (also being released first and not being a binned part)
if someone wants to drop $1k on a prestige model that can handle running 40 poorly optimized Skyrim mods instead of 10, that's their business even if everyone else thinks it's retarded.
>>51867652
Lol nope
r9 380 or gtx 960 im buying one tomorrow
>>51872904
what makes you think it was the VRAM?
usually the VRMs go first, causing wonky GPU behavior from unstable voltages.
>>51871582
The 4GB makes it choke, and two 390x kicks a fury xs ass anyway.
gtx 960
>>51868813
Eh, I just picked up a Zotac GTX 980 Ti Amp Extreme for $670, it can run 1500 stable. I'll just get another one after the pascal comes out and be fine for anything in the near future
>>51862991
if you are poor
>960
if you got a job
>980ti
and don't even think about amd
>>51873306
ready for everything except DP 1.3 high refresh rates, that is.
what's the point in being able to exceed 60 fps at 4k if you can't drive a monitor faster than 60 Hz?
>>51873352
you get a 144hz monitor, that 980ti can push 4k past 60fps assuming it isn't a huge tv or somthing
>>51873404
the thing is that DP 1.2 is limited to about 700M 24b pix/s, while DP 1.3 will hit a little over 1Gp/s.
1440p240 and 2160p120 will be real things a year from now, but only on Pascal/Fury2.
>>51870847
>>51873534
and by the time that comes out a new thing will be coming
If you always wait for the next best thing you"ll just have nothing
Not to mention the price those things will be
R9 Fury NON-X, Sapphire specifically, then unlock the CU's to turn it into a $520 Fury X
Gtx 970
+powerful as fuc
+nvidia
+game works
+4gb ram good enough for 1080p
+Best price to performance
-some samefags shit talk it on /v/ 24/7
>>51873404
What does huge tv have to do with it if you've already stated the GPU, res and refresh rate?
>>51873708
>+4gb ram good enough for 1080p
4 gigs is overkill for 1080...
>>51873646
new versions of DP don't come out every year or two, nor do lithography node jumps.
2016 is the year to upgrade graphics, not 2015, and most likely not 2017.
Go ahead and love your 980Tis all you want, they're still going to be obsolete as fuck a year from now.
>>51873735
You're right. I should have added that it future proofs 1080p gaming. I wouldn't consider any card over a 970 until gpus can actually reliably do at least 60fps at 4k with a single card solution in the mid range price bracket.
Also, I meant /g/, not /v/.
>>51862991
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/directCompute.html
/thread
>>51873268
When has a game ever oversaturated more than 4GB in a load-bearing way?
/g/ - tech support
can I sli a GTX 970 G1 with a vanilla GTX 970?
>>51872157
I know it sounds pretty nitpicky but I'm glad he gave it 5 stars.
If he gave it 0 or 1 then it would be 55 gallons of lube tier laughable.
the problem with the nvidia vs amd war is that nvidia has won it due to the numbers game, even if amd comes out with better performing cards like right now the 390 outperforms the 970 at the same price point.
but it outperforms it on text only not in real-life video game application, this is because since nvidia has been getting so popular over the last few years due to winning the meme war, almost all the developers prioritize nvidia cards over amd.
>oh geee we have this hardware problem, should we fix 75% of our users first or 25%?
yea i know nvidia is super expensive for the numbers it puts out, but GAMES are more optimized for nvidia and this is a fact.
both companies have driver problems but it seems like nvidia is the one that always pushes fixes the fastest.
the r9 390 should be benchmarking at least 25-50% more than the gtx 970 since it has 4.5gb more but the fact that it is below par or at par most of the time shows you, that most games developers just utilize nvidia more.
i think nvidia will get even more love come dx12 when developers can get more into the hardware. since most of their users will be nvidiafags
>>51873735
GTAV uses more than this regularly.
>>51873965
GTA in 4k has used 6.2gb of vram for me before.
>>51874049
The way it's meant to be played.
>>51874049
>i think nvidia will get even more love come dx12 when developers can get more into the hardware. since most of their users will be nvidiafags
Look up dx12 benchmarks, GCN performs quite well, significantly over NVIDIA
